Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd, t/a Crockfords [2017]
UKSC 67
The decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom late
last year in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd1
has sparked significant commentary due to its relevance to the
historically disparate domains of criminal law and contractual
interpretation. The case dissects the notion of 'cheating'
in the context of gambling and casts light on what is required to
prove that certain conduct is 'dishonest'. The discussion
put forward is particularly relevant to the commission of
white-collar crime offences such as fraud.
Facts
Mr Phil Ivey, described by some as the 'world's best
poker player', initiated civil proceedings to recover
£7.7 million in winnings from London casino, Crockfords. The
casino had previously refused to pay out his winnings on the basis
that Mr Ivey had cheated at the game of Baccarat. Mr Ivey, and his
associate, Ms Sun (also a professional gambler) utilised a playing
strategy known as
